Search Images Maps Play YouTube News Gmail Drive More »
Sign in
Screen reader users: click this link for accessible mode. Accessible mode has the same essential features but works better with your reader.

Patents

  1. Advanced Patent Search
Publication numberUS7478365 B2
Publication typeGrant
Application numberUS 10/757,718
Publication dateJan 13, 2009
Filing dateJan 13, 2004
Priority dateJan 13, 2004
Fee statusPaid
Also published asCA2553440A1, CN1954298A, CN100511176C, EP1709538A2, US20050188271, WO2005071545A2, WO2005071545A3
Publication number10757718, 757718, US 7478365 B2, US 7478365B2, US-B2-7478365, US7478365 B2, US7478365B2
InventorsJohn Randall West, Satheesh Kumar Madathiparambil Gopinathan Nair, Andrew Hyun-Chul Kim
Original AssigneeSymphony Services Corp.
Export CitationBiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan
External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet
Method and system for rule-based generation of automation test scripts from abstract test case representation
US 7478365 B2
Abstract
A general rule-based technique is provided for generating a test case from an abstract internal test case representation. The abstract internal test case representation is based on a test case representation model that includes application states (state information), external interaction sequences (control flow information) and input data. The abstract representation in essence provides a platform independent representation of test cases. An application object model provides the representational capabilities required for capturing structural and behavioral properties of the application under test. Rules can be specified to define which application states (state information), external interaction sequences (control information) and input data sets should be used in the generation of the test case. A technique based on platform mapping is provided to convert a test case into an automation test script for any specific test script execution environment for any specific application platform.
Images(10)
Previous page
Next page
Claims(55)
1. A method for generating test scripts comprising:
providing at least one particular test case in a data store in an abstract representation form;
using abstract representations that have at least three separate components including at least one application state, at least one external interaction sequence and at least one input data, the at least one application state having at least one of: (a) a set of application objects associated with a set of attributes and their values, or (b) a runtime snapshot of an application under test which defines a context of external interaction;
selecting at least one rule-based test case in its abstract representation and using rules for the selection of the at least one application state, the at least one external interaction sequence and the at least one input data, and using the rules to validate the at least one rule-based test case against an application object model, where the application object model is a metadata representation for modeling application under test and includes components selected from application object type definitions for application objects, attribute definitions for each application object type, definitions of methods and events that are supported by each application object type and definitions of effects of events on an application state; and
generating at least one test script based on the at least one rule-based test script wherein the at least one test script can be run in a particular one of a plurality of target test execution environments.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the data store is a relational database management system.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the data store is an Extensible Markup Language (XML) database management system.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the data store is a file system.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one application state comprises a representation of a runtime snapshot of application under test which defines the context of external interaction.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the at least one application state comprises a set of application objects, attributes of the application objects, and values of the attributes.
7. The method of claim 5, wherein the at least one application state is a plurality of application states, and the plurality of application states are arranged in a hierarchical manner.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one external interaction sequence comprises a representation of events invoked by at least one external agent on the set of application objects.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the at least one external agent is at least one of a human agent or a software agents.
10. The method of claim 8, wherein the at least one interaction sequence comprises at least one flow control structure for capturing at least one of a sequential interaction, a concurrent interaction, a looping interaction, or a conditional interaction.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein the validating step comprises both internal validation and external validation.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein the internal validation ensures that components of the at least one particular test case, the at least one external interaction sequence, and the input data are consistent with each other and with an application object model.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein the application object model comprises a metadata representation for modeling an application under test.
14. The method of claim 13, wherein the metadata representation comprises object type definitions for application objects.
15. The method of claim 14, wherein the object type definitions further comprise categorization of each type of application object as a hierarchical type, a container types, or a simple type.
16. The method of claim 15, wherein a particular application state is associated with each hierarchical object type, and wherein a container type is an application object types that can contain other application objects.
17. The method of claim 16, wherein the particular application state associated with a hierarchical object type is at least one of a modal application state or a nonmodal application state.
18. The method of claim 17, wherein the modal application state restricts possible interactions to application object instances available within the at least one application state.
19. The method of claim 13, wherein the metadata representation comprises attribute definitions for each type of application object.
20. The method of claim 13, wherein the metadata representation comprises a definition of methods and events that are supported by each type of application object.
21. The method of claim 13, wherein the metadata representation comprises a definition of effects of events on the at least one application state.
22. The method of claim 21, wherein the effects of events on an application state capture one or more consequences of the event to the application state.
23. The method of claim 22, wherein a consequence of an event is selected from the set consisting of: creation of a new object instance of a given type, deletion of an object instance of a given type, modification of attributes of an existing object instance, and selection of an instance of an object type.
24. The method of claim 23, wherein creation of a new object instance of a hierarchical object type results in creation of a new application state.
25. The method of claim 23, wherein the selection of an object instance of a hierarchical object type results in selection of a certain application state associated with that object instance.
26. The method of claim 11, wherein the external validation validates the at least one rule-based generated test case against an application metadata repository.
27. The method of claim 26, wherein the application metadata repository comprises definitions of application objects and specification of interactions of the application objects within the application under test.
28. The method of claim 26, wherein the external validation provides a static verification test for the at least one rule-based generated test cases.
29. The method of claim 26, wherein the external validation increases productivity by identifying invalid test cases.
30. The method of claim 26, wherein the external validation increases productivity by identifying inconsistencies in statically verifiable application behaviors.
31. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one test scripts comprises a rule-based test cases represented in a scripting language.
32. The method of claim 31, wherein the scripting language is at least one of a typed programming language or an untyped programming languages used for at least one of recording or authoring test cases.
33. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
providing rules for selection of components of test case definitions, external interaction sequences and input data; and further providing rules for data driven test case generation.
34. The method of claim 33, wherein the selection rules are specified using at least one query languages.
35. The method of claim 34, wherein the at least one query language is Structured Query Language (SQL).
36. The method of claim 34, wherein the at least one query language is Extensible Markup Language Query (XQuery) language.
37. The method of claim 34, wherein the at least one query language is Application Programming Interface (API) called from code written in a programming language.
38. The method of claim 34, wherein the use of the at least one query languages allows test cases to be generated from live customer data.
39. The method of claim 33, wherein the data driven test case generation comprises composing the test case based on the input data.
40. The method of claim 39, wherein the input data comprises a plurality of datasets, and wherein at least one of a plurality of test cases or a plurality of external interaction sequences repeated within a loop control structure is generated for each dataset.
41. The method of claim 39, wherein a portion of the input data comprises a plurality of datasets, and the interaction sequences corresponding to the portion of input data are repeated within a loop control structure.
42. The method of claim 39, wherein each element of input data is flagged as either valid or invalid.
43. The method of claim 42, wherein the generation step further comprises providing an appropriate interaction sequence for exception handling when the presence of a first validity flag in an element of the input data that is different from a second validity flag corresponding to the input data when the at least one particular test cases was at least one of recorded or authored.
44. A computer system for generating test scripts, comprising:
a processor;
a memory arrangement coupled to the processor, the memory arrangement configured to store at least one particular test case in a data store in an abstract representation form;
a first set of instructions which, when executed by the processor, configures the processor to use abstract representations that have at least three separate components including at least one application state, at least one external interaction sequence and at least one input data, the at least one application state having at least one of: (a) a set of application objects associated with a set of attributes and their values, or (b) a runtime snapshot of an application under test which defines a context of external interaction;
a second set of instructions which, when executed by the processor, configures the processor select at least one rule-based test case in its abstract representation and using rules for the selection of the at least one application state, the at least one external interaction sequence and the at least one input data, and using the rules to validate the at least one rule-based test case against an application object model, where the application object model is a metadata representation for modeling application under test and includes components selected from application object type definitions for application objects, attribute definitions for each application object type, definitions of methods and events that are supported by each application object type and definitions of effects of events on an application state; and
a third set of instructions which, when executed by the processor, configures the processor to generate at least one test script based on the at least one rule-based test case wherein the at least one test script can be run in a particular one of a plurality of target test execution environments.
45. The method of claim 44, further comprising:
using a language mapping to generate the at least one test script in at least one scripting language.
46. The method of claim 45, wherein the language mapping maps external interactions captured as events on an application object to particular statements in the scripting language.
47. The method of claim 45, wherein a plurality of language mappings are provided at the same time.
48. The method of claim 45, wherein a plurality of test scripts is converted using a plurality of scripting languages at the same time.
49. The method of claim 48, wherein the plurality of test scripts can be used in a plurality of test execution environments.
50. The system of claim 44, wherein the third set of instructions, when executed by the processor, further configures the processor to verify that components of the at least one test script, the at least one external interaction sequence and the input data are each consistent with each other and with an application object model.
51. The system of claim 44, wherein the third set of instructions uses is external validation logic.
52. The system of claim 51, wherein the third set of instructions, when executed by the processor, further configures the processor to validate the at least one test script against an application metadata repository.
53. The system of claim 44, further comprising:
a fifth set of instructions which, when executed by the processor, configures the processor to provide rules for selection of components of test case definition, external interaction sequences and input data; wherein and the rules are data driven test case generation.
54. The system of claim 44, further comprising:
a sixth set of instructions which, when executed by the processor, configures the processor to provide data driven test case generation.
55. The system of claim 54, wherein the sixth set of instructions, when executed by the processor, further configures the processor to compose the at least one rule-based test case as dictated by the input data.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

This invention relates generally to systems and methods for generating test cases, and more particularly to methods and systems for generating test cases using rule-based generation of test cases from abstract representations.

2. Description of the Related Art

Creation and maintenance of proper test cases that provide adequate coverage and effectiveness in terms of uncovering bugs is a very challenging and resource intensive activity. The current approaches in test case management do not ensure required level of reusability and maintainability of test cases. This results in repeating cycles of recreation of test cases from version to version, environment to environment and platform to platform.

Current approaches to test case creation are either manual programming in one of many programming languages or recording test cases using record/playback systems. In both approaches, the test cases are created and managed as sequence of programming language statements known as test scripts. These test scripts are then managed through a set of utilities which treats them like files on storage disks.

One of the disadvantages of managing test cases this way is that they are tied to a target execution environment. Different test execution environments support different scripting languages and same operation will be represented by different statements in these environments. If the enterprise software company decides to change the test execution system, all their test cases have to be recreated in the new environment.

Considering the substantial investments required by such an endeavor, many software development organizations will be tied to a single vendor of test execution environments. In addition, testing enterprise applications in customized environments also presents a challenge. Most of the enterprise applications are substantially customized in their customer environments. Testing the application against a standard test suite can ensure that the application has not been altered in undesired ways. Providing such test cases can reduce the rollout time for such applications at customer sites as well as improve the efficiency of field support activities. The inability of customers to support the same test execution environments as that of the software provider makes this impossible.

Enterprise applications require testing across a large number of platforms. These platforms involve a technology stack of operating systems, database systems and other applications that they work with. For efficient management of test cases, the scripts shall not be tied to any specific platform.

Almost all enterprise applications support internationalization and localization, it is important that the same tests can be executed with data sets in different languages and different locale formats. In order to achieve this, the data sets have to be separated from the test scenarios. When test cases are managed as scripts, this requires one to parameterize the scripts manually. This again involves substantial investments of highly skilled labor.

The test cases that are parameterized, as described in the previous paragraph, are also required to ensure adequate coverage. The same test scenario must be executed with different datasets, different boundary condition values for example, to guarantee proper functioning of the system,

When an enterprise application moves from one release to the next, even subtle changes such as layout changes to user interfaces can result in changes to the test cases. Lack of abstractions within the test case representation using scripts substantially decreases the reusability of test cases and increases maintenance costs.

All enterprise applications have functionality that is repeated in many different contexts. The ability to create test cases in a modular fashion improves their reusability. The test cases for the same functionality may be reused in an test scenarios that uses the same functionality. Most scripting environments provide modularity through support of procedures. Such procedural abstractions are limited in their ability because the test cases not only encompass the procedural abstraction but also the data abstraction. Appropriate abstractions within the test case management systems are to be devised so that test cases can be built in a modular fashion and recombined efficiently and effectively.

There is a need for improved systems and methods for generating test cases. There is a further need for improved methods and systems for generating test cases using rule-based generation of test cases from abstract representations.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Accordingly, an object of the present invention is to provide improved systems and methods for generating test cases.

Another object of the present invention is to provide improved methods and systems for generating test cases using rule-based generation of test cases from abstract representations.

Yet another object of the present invention is to provide methods and systems for generating test cases using rule-based generation of test cases from abstract representations that include application states, external interaction sequences and input data of test cases from data stores.

A further object of the present invention is to provide methods and systems for generating test cases using rule-based generation of test cases from abstract representations that include application states which represents a runtime snapshot of application under test which defines the context of external interaction.

Another object of the present invention is to provide methods and systems for generating test cases using rule-based generation of test cases from abstract representations that include application states that include a set of application objects, its attributes and attribute values.

These and other objects of the present invention are achieved in a method for generating test cases. Rule-based generation of test cases are provided from an abstract representation that includes application states, external interaction sequences and input data of test cases from data stores. Generated test cases are validated. The test cases are then converted to test scripts.

In another embodiment of the present invention, a computer system is provided that includes a processor coupled to a memory. The memory stores rule-based generation of test cases from an abstract representation that includes application states, external interaction sequences and input data of test cases from data stores to produce test cases. Logic validates the test cases. Logic converts the test cases to test scripts.

BRIEF DESCRIPTIONS OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating one embodiment of a test case transformation embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a general flowchart illustrating the FIG. 1 embodiment.

FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram illustrating the relationship of application states and interaction representation utilized in one embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram illustrating one embodiment of test case import utilized with the present invention.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating one embodiment of import process utilized with the present invention.

FIG. 6 is a schematic diagram illustrating an application object model that can be utilized with one embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart illustrating one embodiment of semantic analysis that can be utilized with the present invention.

FIG. 8 is a schematic diagram illustrating a computer system that can be utilized to implement the FIG. 1 test case transformation embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 9 is a schematic diagram illustrating one embodiment of a test case conversion embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 10 is a schematic diagram illustrating one embodiment of a test case conversion embodiment of the present invention utilizing composition, an abstract form and validation.

FIG. 11 is a schematic diagram illustrating a computer system that can be utilized to implement the FIGS. 9 and 10 test conversion embodiments.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

Referring to FIGS. 1 and 2, one embodiment of the present invention is a system 10 and method for transforming test cases. Test cases 12 are imported that are written in one or more scripting languages. Test cases 12 are then converted to an abstract representation 14 which includes one or more application states 16, external interaction sequences 18 and input data 20. Abstract representations 14 are stored in a database system 22. A variety of different database systems 22 can be utilized including but not limited to, a relational database management system, an XML database management system, and the like.

An application state 16 represents a runtime snapshot of an application under test which defines the context of external interaction. In one embodiment, illustrated in FIG. 3, application state 16 is a set of application objects 24, such as a web page or a window control or an account object, for example. Each application object 24 is associated with a set of attributes 26 and their values. For example, a web page can have an attribute 26, called url, which contains the Uniform Resource Locator (URL) corresponding to the current web page, and an attribute 26, called title, which contains the title of the current web page. In one embodiment, the set of applications states 16 is represented in the test case 12 and are arranged in a hierarchical manner.

Scripting languages utilized can be typed or untyped programming languages used for recording or authoring test cases. External interaction sequences 18 can represent events invoked by external agents 28 on application objects 24. External agents 28 can be either human agents or other software agents. Interaction sequencing can include flow control structures 32 for capturing sequential, concurrent, looping, conditional interactions, and the like.

As shown in FIG. 4, in one embodiment, a syntax analysis 34 can be implemented for incoming scripts. Syntax analyzer 34 can be implemented one for each scripting language. Syntax analyzer 34 can utilize rules of syntax analysis 36 that are specified in Extended Backus-Naur Form (EBNF). Syntax analysis can generate a parse tree in the form of an Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) 38. One embodiment of a method of handling scripts with the present invention is illustrated in the FIG. 5 flowchart.

In one embodiment, a semantic analysis 40 is implemented that converts the AST 38 to an abstract internal test case representation 42 based on an Application Object Model (AOM) 44. Semantic analysis 40 decomposes the test cases represented as an AST 38 into application state 16, external interaction sequences and input data.

As illustrated in FIG. 6, AOM 44 can be a metadata representation for modeling application under test. Components of the metadata representation include, but are not limited to, application object type definitions 48 for application objects 24, attribute definitions 50 for each application object 24 type, definitions of methods and events 52 that are supported by each application object 24 type, definitions of effects of events 52 on an application state 16, and the like. One embodiment of a method of performing semantic analysis with the present invention is illustrated in the FIG. 7 flowchart.

Application object type definitions 48 can include additional categorization of each application object 24 type, and can be, (i) hierarchical, (ii) container and (iii) simple. The hierarchical object types are associated with an application state 16 of its own. Application object types 16 that can contain instances of other objects are container types. For example, a web page can be represented by a hierarchical object type and table within the web page by a container type. A label in the page is represented by a simple object type. The state associated with a hierarchical application object type 16 is a modal application state or a nonmodal application state. A modal application state restricts possible interactions to application object 24 instances available within a current application state 16. A dialog window for example restricts all user interactions to the current dialog window.

The effects of events 52 on an application state 16 capture one or more consequences of an event 52 to the application state 16. A consequence of an event 52 can be, creation of an instance of an object of a given type, deletion of an instance of an object type, modification of attributes of an existing object of type, selection of an instance of an object type, and the like.

Creation or selection of a hierarchical object type can result in formation of, a new application state 16, selection of the application state 16 associated with the object type, and the like.

In another embodiment, the abstract representation 14 of test cases 12 is enriched with information from an application metadata repository 54. The abstract representation 14 of test cases 12 can be enriched by extracting values for those attributes 26 of application objects 24 associated with the test cases 12 that are missing in the incoming test script. The enrichment of test cases 12 can decouple test cases 12 and their recording or authoring environments, and the like, and allow usage of attributes 26 that are stable within an application metadata representation 54. For example, an internal identification field 56 within the application metadata repository 54 can be utilized to identify a given object 24 instead of a language dependent display label. This improves the reusability of the test case 12. Because different test execution environments can use different attributes 26 to identify the same application object 24, such decoupling provides platform independence.

In one embodiment, application object attributes 26 and input data are separated from external interaction sequencing to provide automatic parameterization. By automatically separating the data from the test case scenario, the 10 system dramatically reduces the manual labor involved to parameterize the scripts. Using the application object model, input data associated with each event 52 is separated from the scenario definition. The same process is applied to storing the object attributes 26. The input data definition forms a nested table data type definition that is driven for the events 52 involved in the scenario, and object event definitions in the application object model. This allows any data sets that match this definition to be applied to the same set of scenarios.

In another embodiment of the present invention, illustrated in FIG. 8, a computer system 110 includes a processor 112 coupled to a memory 114. Memory 114 stores program instructions 116 executable by processor 112 for converting test cases to an abstract internal representation that includes application state, external interaction sequences and input data. A database 116 stores abstract representation of test cases. A syntax analyzer 118 can be included for incoming scripts. Syntax analyzer 118 generates a parse tree in the form of an Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) 120.

Logic 122 is provided to implement semantic analysis and convert AST 120 to an abstract internal test case representation based on an Application Object Model (AOM). Logic 124 enriches the abstract internal test case representation with information from an application metadata repository. Logic 126 separates application object attributes and input data from external interaction sequencing to provide automatic parameterization.

In another embodiment of the present invention, illustrated in FIGS. 9 and 10, methods and systems 210 are provided for generating test cases 212. The test cases 212 are generated from an abstract representation 214 that includes application states 216, external interaction sequences 218 and input data 220 of test cases from data stores 222. Test cases 212 are produced that are then validated. Test cases 212 are converted to test scripts 224. A variety of data stores 222 can be utilized including but not limited to, a relational database management system, an XML database management system, file system, and the like. Application states 216 can be the same as application states 26.

In one embodiment, rules 226 are provided for the selection of components of test case definition, namely application states 216, external interaction sequences 218 and input data 220, as well as rules for data driven test case generation 228. The selection rules 226 can be specified using query languages including but not limited to, SQL, Xquery, API called from code written in a programming language, and the like. The use of query languages allows test cases to be generated from live customer data.

In one embodiment of the present invention, generation of test case 212 includes composing the test case 212 as dictated by the input data 222. Multiple datasets 230 can be provided for at least a portion, or all, of the input data set 220 for a test case 212. This results in a generation of multiple test cases 212 or external interaction sequences repeated within a loop control structure for each dataset 230. Use of multiple datasets 230, for a portion of the input data 220, results in the interaction sequences corresponding to this portion of input data repeated within loop control structure such as a while loop.

In one embodiment, each element of input data 220 is flagged as valid or invalid using a data validity flag 232. The presence of a validity flag 232 in the input data 220, that is different from the one corresponding to the input data 220 when the test cases 212 were recorded or authored, results in the generation step including appropriate interaction sequences for exception handling. For example, a test case that was stored in the abstract representation 214 can have normal interaction sequence 218 when the valid input data sets 220 are provided. The abstract representation also can contain interaction sequence 218 to be followed in the case of an exception condition such invalid data entry. The generator when generating the test case 212 from this abstract representation along with invalid input data will create a test case which includes interaction sequence 218 for exceptional situation rather than the normal interaction interaction sequence.

The generated test cases 212 can be validated against an external application meta data repository 238. The behavior of the validation can be controlled through additional validation rules 240.

The conversion of test cases 212 from an internal representation to a scripting language can be through platform specific mapping 234. The platform specific mappings include language mappings and other environment mappings. The language mapping used can map external interactions 218, captured as events on an application object, to appropriate statements in the scripting language 236. More than one language mapping can be provided at the same time. This allows generation of test scripts for multiple test execution environments. Additional environment mappings are provided to support additional platform independence. For example, if an application under test uses a third party report writer, the test cases can be represented using a generic report writer object and mappings for the specific report writer can be provided through the environment maps. This level of support can be extended to any level of underlying platform.

In another embodiment of the present invention, as illustrated in FIG. 11 a computer system 310 is provided that includes a processor 312 and a memory 314 coupled to processor 310. Memory 314 stores rule-based generation of test cases 316 from an abstract representation 318. Abstract representation 318 includes application states, external interaction sequences and input data of test cases from data stores to produce test cases. Logic 320 validates the test cases. Logic 322 is provided for converting the test cases to test scripts.

Logic 320 provides that components of a test case definition, namely application states, external interaction sequences and input data, are consistent with each other and with an application object model. Logic 320 can be external validation logic. The external validation logic can include steps that validate a generated test case against an application metadata repository.

Computer system 310 can also include logic 324 that provides rules for selection of components of test case definition, namely application states, external interaction sequences and input data; rules for data driven test case generation. Computer system 310 can also include logic 326 that provides data driven test case generation. Logic 326 can compose the test case as dictated by the input data.

While embodiments of the invention have been illustrated and described, it is not intended that these embodiments illustrate and describe all possible forms of the invention. Rather, the words used in the specification are words of description rather than limitation, and it is understood that various changes may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.

Patent Citations
Cited PatentFiling datePublication dateApplicantTitle
US5600789 *Nov 19, 1992Feb 4, 1997Segue Software, Inc.Automated GUI interface testing
US5634098Feb 1, 1995May 27, 1997Sun Microsystems, Inc.Method and apparatus for environment-variable driven software testing
US6505342 *May 31, 2000Jan 7, 2003Siemens Corporate Research, Inc.System and method for functional testing of distributed, component-based software
US6609248 *Jun 30, 1999Aug 19, 2003Microsoft CorporationCross module representation of heterogeneous programs
US6698012 *Sep 15, 2000Feb 24, 2004Nortel Networks LimitedMethod and system for testing behavior of procedures
US6976246 *May 26, 2000Dec 13, 2005Microsoft CorporationFinite state model-based testing user interface
US7313564 *Nov 25, 2003Dec 25, 2007Symbioware, Inc.Web-interactive software testing management method and computer system including an integrated test case authoring tool
US20030014734May 3, 2001Jan 16, 2003Alan HartmanTechnique using persistent foci for finite state machine based software test generation
US20040194072 *Mar 25, 2003Sep 30, 2004Venter Barend H.Multi-language compilation
Non-Patent Citations
Reference
1 *"WinRunner 7.0 Tutorial", Mercuty Interactive Corp., 2000 (97 pages). Online retrieved at <www.csee.usf.edu/~njayacha/web/edu/automation/wr-tut.pdf>.
2Johannes Ryser, et al., "SCENT: A Method Employing Scenarios to Systematically Derive Test Cases for System Test", Technical Report, Institut Fur Informatik, University of Zurich, pp. 1-78, Mar. 2003.
3N. Scott Bradley, "The GUI Test Builder-Breaking the Testing Bottleneck", Computer Design, Pennwell Publishing, vol. 32, No. 9, pp. 71-72 & 74, Sep. 1, 1993.
4Thomas Ostrand, et al. "A Visual Test Development Environment for GUI Systems", Software Engineering Notes, Siemens Corporate Research, ACM, New York, vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 82-92, Mar. 1, 1998.
Referenced by
Citing PatentFiling datePublication dateApplicantTitle
US7603658 *Nov 17, 2004Oct 13, 2009Oracle International CorporationApplication functionality for a test tool for application programming interfaces
US7610256 *Aug 20, 2007Oct 27, 2009The Mathworks, Inc.Registering rules for entity attributes for validation and inference
US7743281 *Apr 13, 2007Jun 22, 2010Microsoft CorporationDistributed file fuzzing
US7805398Oct 1, 2009Sep 28, 2010The Mathworks, Inc.Registering rules for entity attributes for validation and inference
US7908590Nov 13, 2006Mar 15, 2011Parasoft CorporationSystem and method for automatically creating test cases through a remote client
US7934127Mar 27, 2007Apr 26, 2011Systemware, Inc.Program test system
US7958495Mar 8, 2007Jun 7, 2011Systemware, Inc.Program test system
US7975306Dec 10, 2004Jul 5, 2011Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.Apparatus and method for monitoring secure software
US8132713Feb 23, 2010Mar 13, 2012Visa International Service AssociationSystem and method for automated selection of testing criteria for payment devices
US8245194 *Oct 17, 2007Aug 14, 2012International Business Machines CorporationAutomatically generating unit test cases which can reproduce runtime problems
US8347392Aug 25, 2006Jan 1, 2013Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.Apparatus and method for analyzing and supplementing a program to provide security
US8522083May 8, 2011Aug 27, 2013Panaya Ltd.Method and system for semiautomatic execution of functioning test scenario
US8561024 *Jan 23, 2007Oct 15, 2013International Business Machines CorporationDeveloping software components and capability testing procedures for testing coded software component
US8719795 *Apr 12, 2011May 6, 2014Miami International Security Exchange, LlcSystem and method for automating testing of computers
US8739128May 8, 2011May 27, 2014Panaya Ltd.Method and system for automatic identification of missing test scenarios
US8782606May 8, 2011Jul 15, 2014Panaya Ltd.Method and system for identifying non-executable human-readable test scenarios to be updated due to code changes
US8869110 *Feb 10, 2009Oct 21, 2014Codenomicon OyMethod and arrangement for test case creation
US8893087Aug 8, 2011Nov 18, 2014Ca, Inc.Automating functionality test cases
US8930763Jun 15, 2012Jan 6, 2015Agile Software Pty LimitedMethod and apparatus for testing data warehouses
US8954934May 8, 2011Feb 10, 2015Panaya Ltd.Method and system for removing unessential test steps
US8959485 *Jun 25, 2012Feb 17, 2015Oracle International CorporationSecurity protection domain-based testing framework
US8966447 *Jun 20, 2011Feb 24, 2015Apple Inc.Capturing and displaying state of automated user-level testing of a graphical user interface application
US20080178154 *Jan 23, 2007Jul 24, 2008International Business Machines CorporationDeveloping software components and capability testing procedures for testing coded software component
US20080256517 *Oct 17, 2007Oct 16, 2008International Business Machines CorporationMethod and System for Automatically Generating Unit Test Cases Which Can Reproduce Runtime Problems
US20110314343 *Jun 20, 2011Dec 22, 2011Apple Inc.Capturing and Displaying State of Automated User-Level Testing of a Graphical User Interface Application
US20120005146 *Jul 2, 2010Jan 5, 2012Schwartz DrorRule based automation
US20120266142 *Apr 12, 2011Oct 18, 2012Enver BokhariSystem and Method for Automating Testing of Computers
US20130097586 *Oct 17, 2011Apr 18, 2013International Business Machines CorporationSystem and Method For Automating Test Automation
Classifications
U.S. Classification717/124, 717/115, 717/101, 714/E11.208
International ClassificationG06F9/44, G06F11/36, G06F11/22, G06F11/00
Cooperative ClassificationG06F11/3684
European ClassificationG06F11/36T2D
Legal Events
DateCodeEventDescription
May 28, 2004ASAssignment
Owner name: SYMPHONY SERVICES CORP., CALIFORNIA
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:WEST, JOHN R.;NAIR, SATHEESH K.M. GOPINATHAN;KIM, ANDREWH.;REEL/FRAME:015413/0722;SIGNING DATES FROM 20040504 TO 20040508
Jun 8, 2004ASAssignment
Owner name: SILICON VALLEY BANK, CALIFORNIA
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:SYMPHONY SERVICE CORP.;REEL/FRAME:014706/0255
Effective date: 20040426
Jun 20, 2007ASAssignment
Owner name: SILICON VALLEY BANK, CALIFORNIA
Free format text: SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:SYMPHONY SERVICE CORP.;REEL/FRAME:019458/0619
Effective date: 20070619
Jul 3, 2007ASAssignment
Owner name: SILICON VALLEY BANK, CALIFORNIA
Free format text: SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:SYMPHONY SERVICE CORP.;REEL/FRAME:019529/0428
Effective date: 20070619
Jun 13, 2012FPAYFee payment
Year of fee payment: 4
Nov 2, 2012ASAssignment
Owner name: SYMPHONY TELECA SERVICES, INC. F/K/A SYMPHONY SERV
Free format text: RELEASE OF 2004 AND 2007 SECURITY INTERESTS;ASSIGNOR:SILICON VALLEY BANK;REEL/FRAME:029233/0141
Effective date: 20121025
Owner name: SILICON VALLEY BANK, AS ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT, CALI
Free format text: SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNORS:SYMPHONY TELECA CORPORATION;SYMPHONY TELECA SERVICES, INC.;REEL/FRAME:029233/0072
Effective date: 20121025
Dec 5, 2014ASAssignment
Owner name: ROYAL BANK OF CANADA, AS COLLATERAL AGENT, CANADA
Free format text: SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:SYMPHONY TELECA CORPORATION;SYMPHONY TELECA SERVICES, INC.;SYMPHONY SERVICES ENGINEERING CORP.;REEL/FRAME:034384/0964
Effective date: 20141205
Dec 6, 2014ASAssignment
Owner name: SYMPHONY TELECA CORPORATION, CALIFORNIA
Free format text: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY;ASSIGNOR:SILICON VALLEY BANK;REEL/FRAME:034537/0110
Effective date: 20141205
Owner name: SYMPHONY TELECA SERVICES, INC., CALIFORNIA
Free format text: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY;ASSIGNOR:SILICON VALLEY BANK;REEL/FRAME:034537/0110
Effective date: 20141205
Apr 10, 2015ASAssignment
Owner name: SYMPHONY TELECA CORP., CALIFORNIA
Free format text: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY;ASSIGNOR:ROYAL BANK OF CANADA;REEL/FRAME:035381/0742
Effective date: 20150408
Owner name: SYMPHONY SERVICES ENGINEERING CORP., CALIFORNIA
Free format text: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY;ASSIGNOR:ROYAL BANK OF CANADA;REEL/FRAME:035381/0742
Effective date: 20150408
Owner name: SYMPHONY TELECA SERVICES, INC., CALIFORNIA
Free format text: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY;ASSIGNOR:ROYAL BANK OF CANADA;REEL/FRAME:035381/0742
Effective date: 20150408